TMI Blog2020 (9) TMI 1208X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ERPRISE VERSUS ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL [ 2021 (9) TMI 834 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] preferred by M/s. PVD Enterprise, affidavit in reply was filed by the respondent no.2 before this Court on 10.01.2020. The dispute between M/s.PVD Enterprise and the respondent no.2 is pending before this Court on judicial side in respect of machine imported for the purpose of repairing and refurbishing. In connection with this dispute, inquiry was initiated by the department and the applicant was issued summons, time and again, to remain present before the office. The Hon ble Apex Court, in the case of SIDDHARAM SATLINGAPPA MHETRE VERSUS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS [ 2010 (12) TMI 1085 - SUPREME COURT] , has held that under Section 438 of the Code, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... event of his arrest in connection with the summons bearing Sr. No. 9919 dated 06.11.2019. This Court, on 11.12.2019, was pleased to issue rule returnable on 15.01.2020 and further was pleased to pass an order that the applicant may not be arrested till the returnable date. Heard learned advocate for the applicant. It is submitted by learned advocate for the applicant that the applicant has never imported the goods nor sold in the Indian Market. That, the said goods are for the reexport purpose only. That, the applicant is doing repairing and refurbishing work and the machines were provided to the applicant for the purpose of repairing and/or refurbishing. That, the applicant has no role to play in the commission of the alleged off ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filed by the respondent no.2 in the aforesaid petition and submitted that the respondent no.2 has also admitted the nature of business. That, the applicant was sufficiently interrogated by the DRI and yet no complaint is registered against the applicant. That, this is a fit case to exercise the power under Section 438 of the Code. In support of his arguments, learned advocate for the applicant has relied upon the judgment in the case of Siddharam Satlingppa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra and others, 2011(1) SCC 694 . Ultimately, it was requested by him to allow this application. From the other side, learned advocate for the respondent no.2 has strongly opposed the arguments advanced by learned advocate for the applicant and submitte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... can be issued against the department restraining to arrest the person without issuing notice to them. Considering the facts of the case, learned advocate for the respondent no.2 has requested to dismiss the present application as this is a premature at this stage. Learned APP for the respondent State has supported the arguments advanced by learned advocate for the respondent no.2. Having heard learned advocates for the respective parties and considering the controversy raised in the matter and proceedings against the present applicant, it appears that M/s. PVD Enterprise imported 211 numbers of Used Foreign Origin Printing Machine for repairing and refurbishing. 114 numbers were imported vide Bill of Entry No.4361330 dated 05.08.2019 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hey should not be arrested without 10 days prior notice to them . The Hon ble Apex Court held that neither of the above directions can be said to be legal, valid or in consonance with law. The order of the High Court was a blanket one as held by the Constitution Bench of Apex Court in Gurbaksh Singh and seeks to grant protection to the respondents in respect of any nonbailable offence. It is further held that it would be illegally obstruction, interference and curtail the authority of Custom Officer from exercising statutory power of arrest a person said to have committed a nonbailable offence by imposing a condition of giving 10 days prior notice, a condition not warranted by law. The order of the High Court to the extent of direction iss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uards so that the power of arrest is not abused or misused by the authorities. It is keeping in view these considerations that we have to decide correctness or otherwise of the directions issued by a single Judge of the High Court. Blanket order of bail may amount to or result in an invitation to commit an offence or a passport to carry on criminal activities or to afford a shield against any and all types of illegal operations, which, in our judgment, can never be allowed in a society governed by Rule of Law. The Hon ble Apex Court, in the case of Siddharam Satlingppa Mhetre (supra), has held that under Section 438 of the Code, it is not extraordinary in the sense that it should be invoked only in exceptional or rare cases. A g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
